The hypocrite Jolly Roger

This is a discussion on The hypocrite Jolly Roger within the General Discussions forums, part of the Community Boards category; Well Mario, you can talk about hipocrisy, victims and theft all day long. The simple fact of the matter is ...

  1. #16
    Internet Superhero
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    964
    Well Mario, you can talk about hipocrisy, victims and theft all day long. The simple fact of the matter is that pirates are not just going to stop some day, this is a problem that will persist and get gradually worse, this is the nature of digital media and the internet. The industry is pushing towards a totalitarian approach of censorship and control, what they really should be doing is thinking up ways to give consumers a usable alternative to pirating.
    One of the big ISPs here in Denmark is offering music for free, to download, legally, to all their paying customers. I believe they have around a million or so tracks, no DRM, no nothing. They just cut a deal with the record companies, and then pay for it using their ISP profits, as an extra service. To the consumers, the advantage is significant: No shady torrent sites, constant high bitrates and it's all legal.
    Why aren't more companies doing this? How long will it take them to adapt? Surely, part of running a succesful business is adapting to change, such as the internet and digital media.
    How I need a drink, alcoholic in nature, after the heavy lectures involving quantum mechanics.

  2. #17
    Registered User whiteflags's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    7,762
    To the US ISPs, there is almost no advantage at all though. Currently the law makes every effort to protect them from prosecution if something illegal happens over their network traffic, so it's not like they're at risk for a legal complaint. They don't make anything from the idea, so that's probably why it hasn't happened in America. It might happen if an ISP buys a record company for some reason, but I think they would still pass the cost of the download to the consumer.

  3. #18
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,581
    Quote Originally Posted by Neo1 View Post
    The industry is pushing towards a totalitarian approach of censorship and control
    Is it? All I see around me is a push towards openness. Certainly IP and copyright holders, because they chose that model, should be entitled to have their products in this free and open market. You will not be successful in convincing me they shouldn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neo1 View Post
    One of the big ISPs here in Denmark is offering music for free, to download, legally, to all their paying customers. I believe they have around a million or so tracks, no DRM, no nothing. [...] Why aren't more companies doing this? How long will it take them to adapt? Surely, part of running a succesful business is adapting to change, such as the internet and digital media.
    How long before you think this model becomes unsustainable, if everyone starts to give everything for free? These business models are alright for certain type of content, when delimited to a small market and periodical. You ask for others to do this, but marketing of free content is only sustainable up to a point. Even assuming you will be willing to leave in a ad-driven internet (by another magnitude) and even assuming you are willing to pay the costs of getting something for free indirectly through other means (higher ISP prices, more expensive bandwidth, etc), the simple fact of the matter is that if you mass-market free content, you will kill free content.

    And this does not address the problem of content. What to do with business software, consumer software, server software, gaming software? What to do with books? What to do with the high production value movies? You suggest these things be given free too, because pirates are pirating and so it's companies who should change their ways? C'mon!

    Well Mario, you can talk about hipocrisy, victims and theft all day long. The simple fact of the matter is that pirates are not just going to stop some day
    If they don't feel inclined to stop, why should I? Until I stop feeling damaged by their actions, I think it's sensible to gripe everytime I have an opportunity. I never was, am not, and never will be, one to shut up in the face of something I think is fundamentally wrong.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  4. #19
    Jack of many languages Dino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Katy, Texas
    Posts
    2,309
    Amen. That's warrants a new signature line.
    Mac and Windows cross platform programmer. Ruby lover.

    Quote of the Day
    12/20: Mario F.:I never was, am not, and never will be, one to shut up in the face of something I think is fundamentally wrong.

    Amen brother!

  5. #20
    Internet Superhero
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    964
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    Is it? All I see around me is a push towards openness. Certainly IP and copyright holders, because they chose that model, should be entitled to have their products in this free and open market. You will not be successful in convincing me they shouldn't.
    Openness? Such as DRM? Such as DNS filters to block sites of their choosing. Domain seizures? MPAA and IFPI have done nothing but lobby against net neutrality and net anonymity, they want google to filter their searches, they want ISPs to hand out names of pirates without warrants, a class action lawsuit is on the way against the USCG for extortion, copyright misuse, unjust enrichment and consumer protection violations and fraud against alleged pirates. During the TPB trials in Swedens, both the first and second judge had affiliations with swedish anti-piracy groups. The BPI is responsible for the introduction of surveillance cameras in theaters, and are now pushing for emotional recognition software to be used. In Switzerland Logistep is logging the IPs of all P2P users they come across. VP Joe Biden has stated that he thinks piracy is a "potential threat to national security". It's all straight out of 1984, enjoy your openness.

    How long before you think this model becomes unsustainable, if everyone starts to give everything for free? These business models are alright for certain type of content, when delimited to a small market and periodical. You ask for others to do this, but marketing of free content is only sustainable up to a point. Even assuming you will be willing to leave in a ad-driven internet (by another magnitude) and even assuming you are willing to pay the costs of getting something for free indirectly through other means (higher ISP prices, more expensive bandwidth, etc), the simple fact of the matter is that if you mass-market free content, you will kill free content.

    And this does not address the problem of content. What to do with business software, consumer software, server software, gaming software? What to do with books? What to do with the high production value movies? You suggest these things be given free too, because pirates are pirating and so it's companies who should change their ways? C'mon!
    What do you suggest then? Monitor all internet traffic, reject anything encrypted?
    The market is changing, everyone can get music, books, movies and games for free now, with no trouble at all. There is no market for digital media anymore, do we use highly unconstitutional measures and laws to supervise and dictate which content people can access on the net? These people claim to be capitalists, yet rather than controlling supply, they attempt to control the demand.

    If they don't feel inclined to stop, why should I? Until I stop feeling damaged by their actions, I think it's sensible to gripe everytime I have an opportunity. I never was, am not, and never will be, one to shut up in the face of something I think is fundamentally wrong.
    By all means, keep it up. Just know, if IFPI gets their way, you won't be voicing any opinions on the internet anymore.
    Last edited by Neo1; 12-20-2010 at 10:03 PM.
    How I need a drink, alcoholic in nature, after the heavy lectures involving quantum mechanics.

  6. #21
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,581
    Quote Originally Posted by Neo1 View Post
    What do you suggest then? Monitor all internet traffic, reject anything encrypted?
    I suggest indictments followed by exemplary convictions.
    I suggest changes in the law so those who download or share illegal content are committing a public crime subject to denunciation and jail sentences.

    With clear legal instruments to the illegal use and distribution of copyrighted content, I trust the conditions will then exist for the society to start demanding a push towards fairer copyright rules.

    By all means, keep it up. Just know, if IFPI gets their way, you won't be voicing any opinions on the internet anymore.
    Your dim view of our freedoms and how strong they are in protecting themselves contrasts with your flowered view of how the world is poised to become increasingly a place for illegal activities ("pirates are not just going to stop some day, this is a problem that will persist and get gradually worse, this is the nature of digital media and the internet [SIC]"). What's it then? A policed internet, or bazaar for illegal activities?

    The apparently disproportionate answer of the industry to the problem of copyright infringement has always been, and still is, an unresolved issue. As you say, piracy is rampant and will only grow. Meanwhile, you prefer to focus on a list of intentions from the industry that never amounted to anything substantial. Your worries have their merit. I'm just dazzled with your priorities.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  7. #22
    Internet Superhero
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    964
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    I suggest indictments followed by exemplary convictions.
    I suggest changes in the law so those who download or share illegal content are committing a public crime subject to denunciation and jail sentences.

    With clear legal instruments to the illegal use and distribution of copyrighted content, I trust the conditions will then exist for the society to start demanding a push towards fairer copyright rules.
    You suggest outlawing, fining and locking up 40% of the population of the western world, and even more in third world countries. Everyone and their mother is a pirate nowadays, some more than others ofcourse, but still. Has it come to the point where large private corporations has more power and influence than millions upon millions of people? You talk about excersizing your democatric right to not shutting up when faced with unjust, but at the same time you advocate an utterly plutocrastic countermeasure to digital pirating, what was it about hipocrisy again?


    Your dim view of our freedoms and how strong they are in protecting themselves contrasts with your flowered view of how the world is poised to become increasingly a place for illegal activities ("pirates are not just going to stop some day, this is a problem that will persist and get gradually worse, this is the nature of digital media and the internet [SIC]"). What's it then? A policed internet, or bazaar for illegal activities?
    I'll take net neutrality and net anonymity any day thank you very much.

    The apparently disproportionate answer of the industry to the problem of copyright infringement has always been, and still is, an unresolved issue. As you say, piracy is rampant and will only grow. Meanwhile, you prefer to focus on a list of intentions from the industry that never amounted to anything substantial. Your worries have their merit. I'm just dazzled with your priorities.
    The ACTA is not substantial? The DMCA is not substantial? The RIAA sends more than _a million_ cease and desist letters to private citizens all over the world, every year, threatening to pull them to court unless they pay up. In my book, civil rights and democracy will always outweigh corporate profitability, always.
    How I need a drink, alcoholic in nature, after the heavy lectures involving quantum mechanics.

  8. #23
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,581
    Quote Originally Posted by Neo1 View Post
    You suggest outlawing, fining and locking up 40% of the population of the western world, and even more in third world countries. Everyone and their mother is a pirate nowadays, some more than others ofcourse, but still.
    Wait. 40% of the population? What is it then? Piracy doesn't have a real expression, or privacy is so rampant that almost 1 in 2 people in the industrialized world commits this offense? Because if the latter, no one with a straight face can say piracy isn't affecting these companies returns. 40% of the population means this would be the largest blockade to economic growth since WWII. I suggest you either fabricate your source for this outrageous number, or come down to terms with the fact that perhaps the real figure is much, much lower. I'll risk here 5%. And only of the internet users population. Meaning, 1 in every 20 internet users conducts piracy (here, downloading and sharing illegal content) on a regular basis.

    Has it come to the point where large private corporations has more power and influence than millions upon millions of people?
    Corporations have absolutely nothing to do with the status of a Public Crime. Prosecution would be performed by the state and corporations would no longer be represented as plaintiffs. Meaning, there would be no more private action suits on matters of piracy.

    The reasons I defend this approach are:

    1. Conforming
    I strongly believe piracy is more in line with the status of a Public Order Crime (which is similar in about every western nation). Much more than certain Public Crimes in these countries, like drugs consumption.

    2. Cost
    Prosecuting is less expensive than performing a private action suit and it allows for small copyright holders to be indirectly defended (as part of the 'People'), while privately moved action suits exclude them from defending their copyrights from most situations, due to the high costs involved.

    3. Dissuasion
    The public crime status acts as a deterring measure, more than a means to lock people in jail. Knowing than I'm actually committing a crime against the public, is a lot more effective in having me think twice before doing it.

    4. Proportional Response and Awards
    You can be sure prosecutors won't be filling indictments for thousands of pirates in one sitting, or won't be extorting consumers. Fines will also be defined proportionally to other crimes within the criminal law of that country. And a court will never have to consider a privately defined indemnification. The money will also revert to the state for the benefit of the society.

    You talk about excersizing your democatric right to not shutting up when faced with unjust, but at the same time you advocate an utterly plutocrastic countermeasure to digital pirating, what was it about hipocrisy again?
    Maybe you should think twice before calling me an hypocrite, since I am yet to deliver you the same treatment. Especially because, as it is obvious, you have no idea what a Public Order Crime means. The plutocratic measures are what you have now. Action suits are defined and decided by corporations. The actual ruling by an -- preferably -- impartial judge, who may or may not be sensitive to corruption.

    The ACTA is not substantial? The DMCA is not substantial? The RIAA sends more than _a million_ cease and desist letters to private citizens all over the world, every year, threatening to pull them to court unless they pay up. In my book, civil rights and democracy will always outweigh corporate profitability, always.
    I have one thing to say to you: Want your freedom? Want your rights? Earn them!

    The law protects the ACTA, the DMCA and cease and desist letters. The law even unfortunately allows for the all too obvious extortion being performed by some lawyer companies. But the law doesn't give anyone the right to infringe on copyright.

    So be as adamant in condemning the illegal action of infringing on copyright, and I'll respect you for your opinion on the ACTA, DMCA and cease and desist letters. Otherwise, you have none of that.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  9. #24
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,264
    Quote Originally Posted by Neo1 View Post
    You suggest outlawing, fining and locking up 40% of the population of the western world, and even more in third world countries. Everyone and their mother is a pirate nowadays...
    That just sounds like something "pirates" tell each other to justify their theft. I'd like to see a source for that statistic, because it sounds completely made up.
    bit∙hub [bit-huhb] n. A source and destination for information.

  10. #25
    Guest Sebastiani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Waterloo, Texas
    Posts
    5,708
    Quote Originally Posted by Cat View Post
    It's actually quite a lot different from suggesting you should go and rob a liquor store. There's a huge difference between infringement and theft. It's the difference between stealing your neighbor's car, and going out, looking at your neighbor's car, and building an exact replica in your garage.

    Personally - and I say this as someone who makes a living in software development - I think piracy is an overblown worry. While the number of pirated copies of a program may be very high, you need to remember it's a smaller number of people who download extremely high numbers of programs. Take gaming, for example - assume the average person buys 10 games a year, and the average pirate downloads 300. If that pirate were to go legitimate, they wouldn't BUY 300 games a year, they'd probably buy close to the 10. So even if you had a million copies of your game pirated, the actual number of lost sales is far, far less.

    Plus, there's always the fact that people can be pleasantly surprised and decide to buy a program they wouldn't otherwise have done because they tried it first and liked it. So while piracy may lose some sales, it may gain other sales too.

    Lastly, while it's true I'd always rather someone buy my product than pirate it, I'd rather they pirate it than not have it at all. Though I don't have any concrete numbers to back it up, I'd wager market exposure and word-of-mouth advertising generate more revenue than piracy costs in most cases, especially for the smaller companies that can't afford expensive ad campaigns to generate awareness. In fact I'd wager that if you have a truly good product, the word-of-mouth advertising from piracy could be a bigger ROI than a traditional ad campaign.

    Of course, it's all a matter of how large you are, and a matter of how much piracy there is. Certainly, if everyone pirated we'd all be out of jobs. But some level of piracy is probably a net benefit to the company, not a harm.
    Well, piracy *is* stealing, insofar that one is taking what is not "rightfully" theirs, ie: the product was made available under certain conditions (eg: ownership limited to the original buyer, no public exhibition for profit, etc), and the potential buyer refuses such conditions, choosing instead to obtain the product by some other (and as such, illegal) means. Theft, larceny, burglary - call it what you will (it's just a matter of degrees, anyway); the intent is essentially the same.
    Code:
    #include <cmath>
    #include <complex>
    bool euler_flip(bool value)
    {
        return std::pow
        (
            std::complex<float>(std::exp(1.0)), 
            std::complex<float>(0, 1) 
            * std::complex<float>(std::atan(1.0)
            *(1 << (value + 2)))
        ).real() < 0;
    }

  11. #26
    Reverse Engineer maxorator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    2,318
    Quote Originally Posted by Sebastiani View Post
    Well, piracy *is* stealing, insofar that one is taking what is not "rightfully" theirs, ie: the product was made available under certain conditions (eg: ownership limited to the original buyer, no public exhibition for profit, etc), and the potential buyer refuses such conditions, choosing instead to obtain the product by some other (and as such, illegal) means. Theft, larceny, burglary - call it what you will (it's just a matter of degrees, anyway); the intent is essentially the same.
    You don't really own software/movies/music that you "buy". You just obtain a license to use them. The authors are still the owners and if they were to sell them, they would no longer be the owners. Also, people don't steal a license to use those. That would mean someone else wouldn't have the license anymore. They simply don't have a license. Thus it is copyright infringement, which is not much different legally from patent infringement or trademark infringement. So if you use a company's trademark without permission or use something patented in your products without paying for it, you're on the same par with pirates.

    Now don't think I am trying to justify piracy. Not at all. Piracy is a crime. I just don't see how copyright infringement could be considered a felony. It seems to me that the people who actively fight against piracy want to change the laws just to make an example out of some people. They know it's not that serious a crime, they know they can't get many people sued. But they hope that if they tell a poor single mother to pay $5 million, then everyone else will be too scared to pirate. Now that is in violation with the most basic human rights - noone is to be treated unjustly for the "greater good".
    "The Internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it." - John Gilmore

  12. #27
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,581
    I thought I made my position clear: I strongly believe that by criminalizing piracy and moving the prosecution of such cases to the sphere of the state, you get two major benefits:

    a) You provide the conditions for a serious reform of copyright laws.
    b) You guarantee a proportional response to the crime of copyright infringement.

    So, when you say "It seems to me that the people who actively fight against piracy want to change the laws just to make an example out of some people. They know it's not that serious a crime, they know they can't get many people sued. But they hope that if they tell a poor single mother to pay $5 million, then everyone else will be too scared to pirate.", you are completely and totally missing the point. For one, those 5 million would never be possible under the status of a Public Order Crime in any western country, just so you know.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  13. #28
    Reverse Engineer maxorator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    2,318
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    So, when you say "It seems to me that the people who actively fight against piracy want to change the laws just to make an example out of some people. They know it's not that serious a crime, they know they can't get many people sued. But they hope that if they tell a poor single mother to pay $5 million, then everyone else will be too scared to pirate.", you are completely and totally missing the point. For one, those 5 million would never be possible under the status of a Public Order Crime in any western country, just so you know.
    Single Mother of Four Ordered to Pay $1.5 Million for Music Piracy

    A single mother who has four children was ordered to pay $1.5 million for sharing 24 songs (what's that... 2 albums?) through a P2P application. Very possible.
    "The Internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it." - John Gilmore

  14. #29
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,581
    *sigh* I'm not going to repeat myself.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  15. #30
    Reverse Engineer maxorator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    2,318
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    *sigh* I'm not going to repeat myself.
    Ah, you mean if it was criminalized, then such demands wouldn't be possible. Sorry for not taking a moment to think about what you said.

    Anyway, I'm a bit sceptical about the idea, but I guess it's worth considering. I couldn't imagine how the state would be able to verify copyright violations though, since they can't check for everything on the internet what license it has and go through all the internet. I guess the corporations would still do that on their own and just report such cases. But I am not entirely sure the companies would be that motivated to find and report piracy if they don't earn any direct profit from it.

    I'm afraid it would still continue the same way - the companies would demand money from people and if they pay up, they are not reported. The sums wouldn't be that big I guess, but some people don't want to face the court as a crime suspect and prefer to pay instead.
    Last edited by maxorator; 12-23-2010 at 08:58 AM.
    "The Internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it." - John Gilmore

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21